Patna High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13396 of 2013 ====================================================== Ganga Memorial Educational And Development Society, N.H. 31, Kharuara, P.S. - Harnaut, District - Nalanda Through Its Secretary Manoj Kumar S/O Sri Naresh Prasad Sinha Resident Of Village - Sewdah, P.S. - Harnaut, District – Nalanda, .... .... Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar, 2. The Principal Secretary, Department Of Science And Technology, Technology Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna, 3. Director, Department Of Science And Technology, Technology Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna, 4. Secretary, State Board Of Technical Education, Department Of Science And Technology, Technology Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna, 5. Examination Controller, State Board Of Technical Education, Department Of Science And Technology, Technology Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna, .... .... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner : Mr. Kamal Nayan Choubey, Sr. Advocate M/s Ambuj Nayan Choubey, Shantanu Kumar and Siddhartha Harsh, Advocates : Mr. Devendra Kr Sinha, AAG 2 For the State ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE RAVI RANJAN ORAL ORDER 3 26-07-2013
Legal Reasoning
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Through this writ application, the petitioner-institution seeks quashing and setting aside of the order contained in memo no. 1587 dated 27.06.2013 (Annexure 6) by which its application for grant of affiliation by the State authority has been rejected on the ground that the concerned application was filed after 15th of May, 2013, i.e., after the time schedule which has been fixed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 9048 of 2012 arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 26086 of 2012 and analogous matter vide its judgment dated 13.12.2012. Short facts necessary for consideration of the matter are Patna High Court CWJC No.13396 of 2013 (3) dt.26-07-2013 2 enumerated as under:- The petitioner is an institution imparting technical education. As per the existing law, an approval by the All India Council of Technical Education (hereinafter to be referred to as “AICTE”) is required for running such institution. Thereafter, the State or the University, whichever would be the relevant authority, would be required to grant affiliation for running the institution and also conducting the examinations. The issue related to the grant of affiliation, recognition, etc. came to be considered by the Apex Court in the aforesaid appeal and other analogous matter which was vide Annexure 7 dismissed with certain directions. It appears from the perusal of the judgment of the Apex Court that a time schedule has been fixed for grant of approval, affiliation, advertisement and conduct of entrance examination, etc. which can be found in paragraph 43 of the judgment. From perusal of the aforesaid paragraph, it also appears that 10th of April was fixed for grant of approval or refusal by the AICTE. However, since the appeal from aforesaid refusal or grant is available, the Appellate Committee has been directed to hear the appeal and decide the same before the 30th of April of the relevant year. Thereafter, the last date of granting or refusing approval by the State was fixed to be 15th of May. The petitioner, after the approval granted by the Appellate Committee of the AICTE on 30th of April, 2013 vide Annexure 4, had approached the State authority for grant of affiliation 2 Patna High Court CWJC No.13396 of 2013 (3) dt.26-07-2013 3 on 03.06.2013, i.e., admittedly even after the last date of granting or granting refusal as fixed by the Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment. However, learned counsel for the petitioner, in view of paragraph 48 of the judgment which contains certain directions of the Apex Court, submits that only the colleges which have been granted approval by 30th of April, 2013 shall be included in the brochure/ advertisement/website and for the purpose of admission, thus, the petitioner seeks direction that in above view of the matter, the petitioner-Institution may also be allowed to be included in the brochure/advertisement/website for the relevant purpose. However, I do not find any force in the submission raised on behalf of the petitioner. A judgment would have to be read as a whole and not in pieces. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly laid down a time schedule for the relevant purpose. Though the petitioner’s appeal was allowed on 30th of April, it could not, for some reason or the other, apply for affiliation immediately rather had applied after expiry of the period fixed by the Supreme Court for grant of affiliation. Though it is submitted that the State Government has also not followed the direction of the Apex Court and shifted the date of examination from May to 28th July, 2013, but, in my opinion, this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot modify or alter the order/judgment passed by the Apex Court. That apart, the Apex Court in that very judgment 3 Patna High Court CWJC No.13396 of 2013 (3) dt.26-07-2013 4 has clearly laid down in paragraph 48(ii) that no person or authority shall have the power or jurisdiction to vary the schedule described hereinabove. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on the aforesaid issue, has submitted that the person or the authority stated in paragraph 48(ii) of the judgment of the Apex Court is with respect to such authority which has been described in paragraph 48(i) of the judgment of the Apex Court. However, even then, for granting any relief to the petitioner, the time schedule fixed by the Apex Court would have to be modified, which, as I have already held, cannot be done in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. That apart, learned counsel has not been able to show that the State Government has violated the direction of the Supreme Court contained in paragraph 48 of the concerned judgment by including any institution in the brochure/advertisement/website for the purpose of admission which has either been granted approval after 30th of April or has not been granted such approval at all by the AICTE. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. SC/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J) 4